Words that BYTE

[padamchen]

@Oscar

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/alevism-in-turkey.595253/page-2#post-11087739

This is exactly what I wanted to bring your attention to about the growing fundamentalism of the Turkish side here.

Something members across nationalities here have been complaining about.

But no action is taken.

Are you waiting for a full blown meltdown before starting another thread like this then?

Cheers, Doc

 

[Nilgiri]

You could designate for the mod team certain forum-specific go-to members who are largely responsible and mature and respected, of certain nationalities, and time-zones, and who are found there often. As third umpires/DRS.

That might compensate for your point about it not being possible for mods to be present everywhere all the time.

Ideally a mod should understand the context of a discussion and what has gone on just before, or the issue-specific posting history of the members in question, rather than just take a single reported post, and then adjudicate.

The nationality-specific panel could come in useful to refer back to and get a grip quickly (and reliably) on what went down.

Such members need not be known to the lay public. A For Mods Only resource ....

Cheers, Doc



Have you not noticed though how friendly they are to each other, without Pakistan in between?

Cheers, Doc

Actually really like this idea too.

Some relevant respected members can simply be tasked with being able to "report-plus" in a way (i.e the post gets sent to purgatory for mods to handle down the road when they come online.... be it approve/warning/edit/delete etc). No need to announce or certify who these members are (up to admin decision/discretion) and if any of them abuse the privilege, simply can remove it from their capability (and no biggie in the end)...and try maybe with some other folks. It basically does one level higher than a simple report (which has the flaw that people can keep a chain of crappy replies going afterwards because post is still obv visible till a mod gets around to it).

Sort of like the minutemen idea (vs more standard militia/corps men) in the American revolutionary army. Scouts and skirmishers are important and vital to best direct any larger formation efficiently.

An idea to pass on at least maybe to try out @waz

 

[padamchen]

Actually really like this idea too.

Some relevant respected members can simply be tasked with being able to "report-plus" in a way (i.e the post gets sent to purgatory for mods to handle down the road when they come online.... be it approve/warning/edit/delete etc). No need to announce or certify who these members are (up to admin decision/discretion) and if any of them abuse the privilege, simply can remove it from their capability (and no biggie in the end)...and try maybe with some other folks. It basically does one level higher than a simple report (which has the flaw that people can keep a chain of crappy replies going afterwards because post is still obv visible till a mod gets around to it).

Sort of like the minutemen idea (vs more standard militia/corps men) in the American revolutionary army. Scouts and skirmishers are important and vital to best direct any larger formation efficiently.

An idea to pass on at least maybe to try out @waz

You got the general idea. Though I'm not suggesting a nationality / time zone based first tier screening level full-time before Pakistani mods.

Only a referral panel. If and when and where needed by a Pakistani mod.

Just an idea.

Open to corruption and bias and personal politics/triggets as any other as well ....

Cheers, Doc

 

[coffee_cup]

My point was completely different. How come his credibility is so low when he uses the Army and what it does for cheap popularity? and how come it is so high when he underwrites his comic version of 007, the one who has his masala chai shaken, not stirred?

Sorry to say it Joe, but your argument is very irrational and illogical.
If we were to apply your logic then a poster who usually makes flawed statements should always be rated positive, if by chance one of his posts, where he makes valid point and sound reasonable, gets a positive rating. Or vice versa.

31% is a majority???

Where all others have less than that, it is.
Or have you invented another version of determining the majority vote in a predefined "democratic" system?

Oh, wait, what am I doing? The BJP is already asking how 20% of the population can claim to be a 'minority'; now the entire conversation becomes clear. Without prurience, one can safely say that the colour of your undies is khaki; you are a deep cover Sanghi false-flagging here. 'fess up now, and you won't get your teeth extracted without anaesthetic.

Are you expecting an answer on this?

[..]As far as influencing the vote is concerned, the factors you mention are important and relevant; [..]

This was the whole point, in your previous post you were ruling them completely out.

Take religious beliefs. I really feel sorry for a Pakistani viewer of Indian social or institutional working; don't go by your illusions, hothoused in fora like these, go by the experience of Pakistani ex-pats working with Indians in various parts of the globe. THAT is the reality, not what you imagine thanks to watching too many Sunny Deol movies.

It is not Pakistan who elected Hafiz Saeed or Lakhnavi as their PM or CM. It is India who has elected their versions of Hafiz Saeed's and Lakhnavi's as PM, CM or whatever. I personally feel sorry for some moderate people like you, who have to defend the undefendable.

The rise of Hindu extremism in Indian society is there for everyone to see. If you want to keep your eyes shut to that fact, it is your choice.

And for the record, I dont watch Bollywood cr@p.

I suspect Oscar would heartily encourage that.

Yes, I think we seriously need to move on.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Sorry to say it Joe, but your argument is very irrational and illogical.
If we were to apply your logic then a poster who usually makes flawed statements should always be rated positive, if by chance one of his posts, where he makes valid point and sound reasonable, gets a positive rating. Or vice versa.



Where all others have less than that, it is.
Or have you invented another version of determining the majority vote in a predefined "democratic" system?



Are you expecting an answer on this?


This was the whole point, in your previous post you were ruling them completely out.



It is not Pakistan who elected Hafiz Saeed or Lakhnavi as their PM or CM. It is India who has elected their versions of Hafiz Saeed's and Lakhnavi's as PM, CM or whatever. I personally feel sorry for some moderate people like you, who have to defend the undefendable.

The rise of Hindu extremism in Indian society is there for everyone to see. If you want to keep your eyes shut to that fact, it is your choice.

And for the record, I dont watch Bollywood cr@p.



Yes, I think we seriously need to move on.

Then let it be on record that I am not responding to your post, unsound and maimed as it is, in the interests of the forum in general.

 

[padamchen]

@Retired Troll

Cheers, Doc

 

[El Sidd]

@Retired Troll

Cheers, Doc

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bite_the_cartridge